Clemens Vs. McNamee

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 4:02 am

This is obviously a rather big story so feel free to talk about it here. I'm not watching it live but from the sounds of things on ESPN's blog, Clemens is digging himself a deeper and deeper hole with every word that's coming out of his mouth.

Sack · Post by **Sack** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:01 am

The fact the Roger was asked what uniform hat he would be wearing into the HOF was all you needed to hear.

Now that he is finally retired, nice to see that he can handle a Softball.

He is as defiant as ever.

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:15 am

This picture reminds me of OJ's trial.

I feel bad for him though, unlike OJ he didn't have/get anyone killed.

Sack · Post by **Sack** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:23 am

After a few minutes this afternoon with Debbie Clemens, I'm going to start wishing for a PACKERS broadcast and a lil Deanna Favre time.

Never thought anything would make we root for that.

Edwards Kings · Post by **Edwards Kings** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:31 am

I may just be falling into that grumpy old man syndrome, but everytime I look up and see Henry Waxman with the rest of the bozo's spending hundreds of thousands if not millions of tax payer dollars on what is in the grand scheme of things a non-event...I just want to go postal. Congress has bigger fish to fry.

The Mighty Men · Post by **The Mighty Men** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 6:44 am

I can tell you this. These questions are terrible. They either have no idea how to cross-examine a witness, or they are asking bad questions on purpose. Man, would I love a crack at it.

Clemens' answers are pretty evasive, too. He won't answer some questions directly.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:36 am

Originally posted by The Mighty Men:

I can tell you this. These questions are terrible. They either have no idea how to cross-examine a witness, or they are asking bad questions on purpose. Man, would I love a crack at it.

Clemens' answers are pretty evasive, too. He won't answer some questions directly. Ah, you lawyers always want in on one of these games, right?

You have to admit, though, Clemens is incredibly defiant and if he is lying he's going to face a lot of time for perjury. I thought it was interesting when they talked about his wife's use of HGH how she sat behind him and looked like she was ready to kill McNamee. Either they both know how to act real good or not all of McNamee's story is accurate.

Someone is facing a lot of perjury jail time. I haven't totally figured out who yet.

Chest Rockwell · Post by **Chest Rockwell** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:52 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by The Mighty Men:

I can tell you this. These questions are terrible. They either have no idea how to cross-examine a witness, or they are asking bad questions on purpose. Man, would I love a crack at it.

Clemens' answers are pretty evasive, too. He won't answer some questions directly. Ah, you lawyers always want in on one of these games, right?

You have to admit, though, Clemens is incredibly defiant and if he is lying he's going to face a lot of time for perjury. I thought it was interesting when they talked about his wife's use of HGH how she sat behind him and looked like she was ready to kill McNamee. Either they both know how to act real good or not all of McNamee's story is accurate.

Someone is facing a lot of perjury jail time. I haven't totally figured out who yet. [/QUOTE]How bout choice C they are both not telling the complete truth. Mcnamee stretches the truth, but come on- how much difference is there really between Bonds and Clemens?

King of Queens · Post by **King of Queens** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 7:59 am

This pretty much say it all:

www.nydailynews.com/news/galleries/fron ... ages_.html

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:02 am

clemens is lying. being "defiant" means nothing. usually it means you have a huge ego. nice article by witlock on this. no way mcnamee being an ex cop wanted to go to jail. he is definately a "wanna be" and probably lied some - but was never going to lie about clemens because i think he knew pettites character. if he said he injected knoblack and pettite and not clemens and pettite says he injected all 3- jail time. clemens is lying to protect his status. which is hard for the average person to understand ( including me). but he is not interested in being average and out of sight. he wants to be roger clemens. that is one difference between him and bonds- bonds could give a crap about the average white guy. btw- the first guy i ever saw " act defiantly" about a possible criminal indictment was spiro agnew and his famous "that is a damn lie" speach about tax evasion. a year later he plead " no contest".

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:05 am

btw- check out the story on the nanny. clemens calls her after 7 years? i think many people have been offered $ by mr. clemens- some turned him down.

JEagle · Post by **JEagle** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:10 am

What a joke...these congressmen need to get off their knees and stop suckin roger Clemens $#@%...he must be donating a ton of money to the republican party...pathetic

sportsbettingman · Post by **sportsbettingman** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:14 am

Clemens radiates "liar" since this got big.

We'll see...but I'd say it's at 90% he's proven to be the bigger liar, and gets punished.

~Lance

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:19 am

This really needs to become a TV series.

Or at least a mini-series.

Walla Walla · Post by **Walla Walla** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:20 am

This whole thing is B.S. Congress wants to look into baseball than put the owners on the stand.

After all who really made all that money the last 10 years!!!!!!!!

KJ Duke · Post by **KJ Duke** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 8:27 am

Originally posted by Walla Walla:

This whole thing is B.S. Congress wants to look into baseball than put the owners on the stand.

After all who really made all that money the last 10 years!!!!!!!!

Now that would be entertaining. Clemens rolls over in a deal with the Feds, selling out the owners & commisioner who secretly supported usage along the lines of John Rocker's comments a few days ago.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:22 am

So for those who watched the hearing today who do you think came off looking more credible - McNamee or Clemens?

headhunters · Post by **headhunters** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:26 am

to me it is not about who "looks" more credible. roger has spent tons of time in front of the camera and has spent millions on a legal team that prepared him endlessly. for me- the cop is more credible. pettite and the nanny sided with him. conseco sided with roger. end of story. a joke. a waste of tax $.

Tom Kessenich · Post by **Tom Kessenich** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:28 am

I wasn't talking about appearance or how composed one or the other was or wasn't. I should have been more clear - whose stories came across as being mor credible? To me, that's the most important issue here.

freddiezee · Post by **freddiezee** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 9:56 am

Does anyone actually believe that Clemens never took anything?

JohnZ · Post by **JohnZ** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:05 am

Originally posted by freddiezee:

Does anyone actually believe that Clemens never took anything? I do.

Signed,

Pete Rose

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:27 am

purely hypothetical of course,

Greg (and Tom),

A credible person is doing a report on fraud in fantasy sports gaming. It's a big deal for the industry and you know certain gamers are rife with fraud. Mr Credible calls and asks to speak with you concerning some of the information that has come up that is currently a part of the report.

You are not happy about this. Your name in a report like this will only damage your fantasy gaming site's good name. Maybe it's nothing though. But maybe there is some erroneous damaging statements from some digruntled former employee? In your heart of hearts you KNOW your contest is on the up and up. But good God, don't you go FIND OUT what Mr Credible has to say ???? Don't you go down there and &$%8! find out what the #&%$! is being said about you !! Before the INK IS DRY don't you head the indians off at the pass ??

He did no such thing.

He's an absolute total lying sack.

Greg Ambrosius · Post by **Greg Ambrosius** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:36 am

Originally posted by Quahogs:

purely hypothetical of course,

Greg (and Tom),

A credible person is doing a report on fraud in fantasy sports gaming. It's a big deal for the industry and you know certain gamers are rife with fraud. Mr Credible calls and asks to speak with you concerning some of the information that has come up that is currently a part of the report.

You are not happy about this. Your name in a report like this will only damage your fantasy gaming site's good name. Maybe it's nothing though. But maybe there is some erroneous damaging statements from some digruntled former employee? In your heart of hearts you KNOW your contest is on the up and up. But good God, don't you go FIND OUT what Mr Credible has to say ???? Don't you go down there and &$%8! find out what the #&%$! is being said about you !! Before the INK IS DRY don't you head the indians off at the pass ??

He did no such thing.

He's an absolute total lying sack.

I would like to respond to Quahogs' question and say that at no time did I ever do steroids or HGH. At no time did I have SEX with that WOMAN. I did not bet on baseball while managing the Cincinnati Reds. I did not do anything that he is accusing me of above. I'm not even sure how my name got in the Mitchell Report, Q.

Whew. Does that answer your question?

Quahogs · Post by **Quahogs** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:46 am

Originally posted by Greg Ambrosius:

quote:Originally posted by Quahogs:

purely hypothetical of course,

Greg (and Tom),

A credible person is doing a report on fraud in fantasy sports gaming. It's a big deal for the industry and you know certain gamers are rife with fraud. Mr Credible calls and asks to speak with you concerning some of the information that has come up that is currently a part of the report.

You are not happy about this. Your name in a report like this will only damage your fantasy gaming site's good name. Maybe it's nothing though. But maybe there is some erroneous damaging statements from some digruntled former employee? In your heart of hearts you KNOW your contest is on the up and up. But good God, don't you go FIND OUT what Mr Credible has to say ???? Don't you go down there and &$%8! find out what the #&%$! is being said about you !! Before the INK IS DRY don't you head the indians off at the pass ??

He did no such thing.

He's an absolute total lying sack.

I would like to respond to Quahogs' question and say that at no time did I ever do steroids or HGH. At no time did I have SEX with that WOMAN. I did not bet on baseball while managing the Cincinnati Reds. I did not do anything that he is accusing me of above. I'm not even sure how my name got in the Mitchell Report, Q.

Whew. Does that answer your question?

[/QUOTE]

LOL.. at least you left out the 3 monkey defense. Hear no failed drug test, Speak no English, See no past.

Navel Lint · Post by **Navel Lint** » Wed Feb 13, 2008 12:42 pm

I watched the entire hearing today. I had tried to reserve my judgment on Clemens until watching but was previously leaning toward McNamee and the Mitchell report. I did not hear Clemens say anything that would sway me in his direction. In fact. The quoted depositions of Pettite and Knobloch, as well as the anecdotal evidence of Mrs. Clemens using HGH, have made me believe more than ever that Clemens did use performance enhancing drugs.

That being said. I think the use of PED’s throughout baseball was pervasive and one mans career should not be held to a greater (or lesser) standard than others of his era just because I suspect he may have “used”. If I had a vote, players such as Clemens, Mcgwire, Bonds, and Sosa would all make it to the HOF. Results of Mcgwire’s HOF balloting the last two years suggest that I am in the minority on that issue.